the batsman's point of view or the bowler's, but not both. It is this which makes me think that the present-day cricketers ought to lay great weight on the opinion of players like F. S. Jackson, A. E. Trott, S. M. J. Woods, J. R. Mason, and Lockwood, who can both bat and bowl. I do not deny, however, that the subject is a very difficult one, and any rash or injudicious change would be a calamity, as it would defeat its own object and produce reaction, which would be most deplorable. Fully admitting then both the difficulty of the subject and the danger of legislating on wrong lines, I cannot help thinking that a beginning might be made by the M.C.C., which is the prime authority, and which is, moreover, in a financial position to do so, inaugurating some matches to test experimentally a new rule. The club might play the Yorkshire eleven, or any first-class county, and in that particular match test what the effect of the alteration in Rule 24, relating to l.b.w., would be. Matches have already been played where a net has been set round the ground, and every run has been run out. However, the effect of this has not realised the expectations of some.
